Thursday, December 06, 2018

Harvey, Bret, whatever. They're all just intellectual cowards who hold exactly the same positions for exactly the same reason... while publicly deploring identity politics for Americans, Europeans, and soon, Han Chinese.

Stefan Molyneux@StefanMolyneux
From 800 BC to 1950 AD, 97% of the world’s scientific advancements occurred in Europe and North America.

98% of the significant figures were male.

No white males, no modern world.

Fact.

I’m grateful.

Are you?

End the hate.

Aspire to admire, whatever the race.

Bret Weinstein@BretWeinstein

This is a modern creation myth, delivered as if it were an analysis. It is as inaccurate and self-serving the intersectionalist's claim that all disparities arise from oppression. Those pushing these stories persuade through flattery. Don't be fooled. Don't take the bait.

Lauren Southern@Lauren_Southern

Don’t take the bait? How about have a productive debate and convince people of your position. I’d love to hear this discussion! I’m sure @RubinReport or someone…

Bret Weinstein@BretWeinstein
Not interested in debating it. Here's why: @StefanMolyneux is not stupid, but his stated position is. That suggests his purpose is not an analytical one.The logic is straightforward. His position is nuts. But he might well advance his agenda, and I want no part of that.

Stefan Molyneux@StefanMolyneux
Can’t find an argument anywhere here, can you? People should just be honest and admit that they are afraid to discuss the scientific reality of human biodiversity because it might get them in trouble. That’s what Jordan Peterson did.

What, precisely, is nuts and stupid about Stefan's statement? To observe the fact that 97 percent of the world’s scientific advancements before 1950 occurred in Europe and North America? To observe the fact that 98 percent of the significant figures involved were men? These are either facts and therefore true or false assertions. Or are we to take this as evidence that Weinstein now publicly accepts Jordan Peterson's contention that facts are not necessarily true?

The Ineffectual Dork Weasels are cowardly fourth-rate academics and talking heads who have been appointed to be gatekeepers for the Right by the New York Times and are being propped up by the global Satanists in order to try to slow down the growing trend towards nationalism and Christianity in the West.

They are going to fail abysmally due to their cowardice, as Ben Shapiro has run from debates with me and Milo, Jordan Peterson has run from debates with Marxists despite publicly claiming that Marxists are afraid to debate him, and now Bret Weinstein is running away from debate with Stefan Molyneux. Everyone can see the pattern. They have literally no ability to defend their own positions and little more capacity for offering substantive criticism of anything except a nebulous bogeyman of "the Radical Left" that they somehow cannot define correctly.

There is a very good reason these ineffectual losers only talk to each other, as talking to anyone who is both honest and capable of seeing through them will expose them almost instantly. They can't afford to engage with Stefan, or Milo, or me, because they know perfectly well that their positions are false and they know that we know their positions are false too.

All that anyone needs to do to publicly discredit these weasels is precisely what I've done in Jordanetics, which is to quote their own words extensively and show people exactly what they are saying in the correct context. Even their tweets, when compared over time, are damning, because their core positions are intrinsically hypocritical, incoherent, and deceptive.

82 Comments:

These IYI's know that they are cowards and deceivers, it's the job that they are paid to do...When a giant figure like Watson can be un-personed for a comment about Africans in the lab, Academics live in fear of the same treatment.

Perfect example of a cuckservative treating rhetoric like it's inherintly evil - though he appears to think a dialectic with Stephen is also evil. I would love to press him further on this. What do we do with this evil fact if we cannot engage it verbally? Maybe he'll claim it should be ignored, but then what happens when it can't be ignored? Fire up the incinerator?

"Who provided the other 3%? I'm the assuming the Han Chinese. Thought it would have been higher."The real numbers are 99% and 99%..If you doubt that, real Charles Murray's book on Human Achievement, and Murray didn't include people like Tesla and the ancient Greeks and Romans.

It’s too bad too that Bret chops off debate. Stefan presented an interesting topic. He doesn’t really say why he thinks the fact came to be, only that one should be grateful. There could be a number of interesting factors for WHY the facts are what they are.

Traditional roles for men were hunting, tool making and other engineering projects, and warfare. Traditional roles for women were having and nurturing babies, family and social life...Evolution operated accordingly.

So Weinstein is the man who is finally going to prove true the Blank Slate Theory?

Of course I doubt this, he will fall into the rhetoric of discredit and disqualify and his conservative opposition still thinking themselves the supreme beings of the intellectual world will fall right into the usual trap.

This kind of ties in with the latest at Sailer's where Douhat supposedly steps on the toes of our new social justus elite by timidly defending the old white elite of America.

Speaking of crackpottery, this Weinstein fool will basically have to fall back on Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel" line of un-reasoning, ya know the world where buck naked cannibal's who paddled around the Pacific are smarter than Newton or something. I say this just in case anyone would dare discredit and disqualify one of our legally privileged elite such as Weinstein.

The worldview of these people is delusion built upon more delusion. They cannot debate as this will make all too transparent how delusional they really are. Going through life while wallowing in victimhood is profoundly unhealthy for the soul. Blaming every white male as an oppressor is extremely counter productive. When things go hot, these verminous rats will find out just how counter productive that can be.

Yes, that's awfully weak. There are times that "this is too stupid to debate" is a valid position, but a simple claim about historical stats isn't one of them. If his numbers are wrong, one link should serve to discredit them. Otherwise it's a fair topic for debate.

Stefan back in the day also tried to debate Thundef00t, a famous youtuber from the Skeptics (TM) era of the internet. Naturally the Skeptic(TM) attempted to poison the well and try to discredit Stefan in an attempt to maintain his big-brained image for his viewership.

Stefan also tried to debate Anna Kasparian of TYT. She refused saying (I shit you not) "he is a master manipulator because he makes you think he's actually sane and HE'S BASING HIS ARGUMENTS ON LOGIC". I have it timestamped: https://youtu.be/jrpa6nnG7QE?t=1393

Good times.

This time around Stefan is not being attacked and discredited in the same manner because he has been used by Peterson to ascend in his career. This inbred weasel guy is basically a poor man's version of Peterson. He's plan B. Discrediting Stefan would mean discrediting Peterson, and discrediting Peterson would mean discrediting Weinstein.

Zaklog the Great wrote:Hmmm, it appears that Molyneux has become disenchanted with JBP. That's interesting news.

Stefan referred the "Half Drunk, Oops Baby, Life Over?" caller to Jordan Peterson's material for help in sorting out his psychology. So I noted Stefan is not dismissing Jordan Peterson in non-political areas.

pyrrhus wrote:Traditional roles for men were hunting, tool making and other engineering projects, and warfare. Traditional roles for women were having and nurturing babies, family and social life...Evolution operated accordingly.I would argue that natural selection prunes the genetic tree to meet the needs in a given area or group. There is no evolution involved. More like breeding dogs or horses toward a given need.

I encountered these in my early "discussions" with libertarians, bringing up facts and practical realities, e.g. roads without eminent domain. I've had exactly one admit that some roads would simply not be built. The rest repeat something like "there are alternate routes" as a mantra even when I've given a specific example where there isn't (e.g. Mackinac bridge between Michigan's penninsulas), at least if you don't or can't use a ferry or go by way of Chicago.

The Talking points are like a "tech support checklist" - you call in and have to confirm you've turned the computer on, give all kinds of irrelevant details, and go through the kabuki even though you know it is your hard drive because it is screeching like a banshee.

Thinkers like Molyneux and Vox know how to find the cracks and exploit them to shatter the arguments. Talking points are merely a thicker facade. There can even be real facts, evidence, and wisdom, but a TPD is not capable of understanding or bringing them to the fore in a real debate.

You also see this in the recent debate with Steve Bannon. Bannon talked practical results, Frum said Bannon and those who were with him were "bad people" but other than insults didn't explain why. And implied deplorables should be glad to suffer (when Frum doesn't) - Bannon started with the 2008 Billionaire Bankster Bailout!

It is no longer theoretical - reality is showing the breakdown of everything. Both left and right have theories, but what happens when implemented?

Right now the globalist left needs the IDW TPDs to come out and misdirect the attention of those on the right they can, lest they notice Trump is succeeding and winning.

So Peterson won't be forced to use wrong gender terms? He will do everything else. So Shapiro is good on a cultural thing or two, same idea. They are the new versions of NR, or the Cuckservatives, or the neoCons. Talking sort of on the right, but while doing so saying we must give into the left, we must not fight in any way that would win, etc.

@23 - or was it Sargon of Akkad that couldn't even handle Richard Spencer? I enjoy Thunderf00t's takedown of snake-oil, especially things like the hyperloop, but don't see debate topics, and he has responded.

"What, precisely, is nuts? To observe the fact that 97 percent of the world’s scientific advancements before 1950 occurred in Europe and North America? To observe the fact that 98 percent of the significant figures involved were men? These are either facts and therefore true or false assertions."

Here deep in one of the bluest states, they'd say that women would have contributed more if they were oppressed. Same for the most of the non-white races, I think.

I think the realized betrayal of those who nationalists and conservatives thought to be leaders, however incorrectly will help galvanize us to find true allies, not figureheads.

I think these deceptions once clearly shown to all will have a wonderfully positive impact on nationalism as those who have been mislead once, tend to be much more guarded. I was very happy to see Stefan drop those truth bombs.

B.Weinstein isn't any more "conservative" than PBJ is. like PBJ, he's never claimed to be "conservative". Weinstein was a prof at Evergreen College, for God's sake.

you take a thorough and overt Leftist, put a couple of disagreements with overt Communism in their mouth, and you people are all raving about your new Muh Conservative!

what in the hell?

the only thing of value Weinstein has ever done in his life was refuse to bend the knee to BLM supremacists who were demanding that White People not be permitted to walk on the college campus on a specific day.

that DOES NOT make him any more "conservative" or Right Wing than George Orwell. who was a life long International Socialist. ie - slightly to Right of Communists and slightly to the Left of Hitler / National Socialism.

Well, that is the crux of things, isn’t it. The core target of brainwashing for so long. That the inventiveness of civilization, the ability to create civilization (and progress to advanced civilization) out of not civilization, and the expression of certain recessive genes (at the expressed exclusion of many dominant genes, are linked and correlate in such a way as to demonstrate causality.

Take the Romans. They had steam power/engine (Aeolipile, 1,900 years ago) and the piston. Had they combined the two, they could have had steam locomotion, the foundation of the rail system, which made industrialization possible. On our own timeline, it was a matter of around a 250 year development to go from rudimentary power to space shuttles. In theory, had Rome applied the principles and civilization held, man could have landed on the moon about the same time Constantine took he throne in our timeline. That sort of constant potential simply is not demonstrated outside of that recessive gene collection.

Instead, the lie of sameness is sold. Well, until recently, only while it helped the West surrender out of a sense of misplaced and fraudulant guilt.

Although there is a chink in the armor of the Left, with statements of Western civilization and the associated patriarchy being said to be a racist expression suppressing other concepts/forms of civilization entirely different and with totally different metrics for success. Such as wiping your ass with your hand and smearing it on the wall is a part of a civilization far more superior and advanced to Western civilization.

So, here you go. People supposedly emerged out of Africa, and yet it is at a newer habitation whereby real technologically advanced civilization emerged out of nothing, under unfavorable climatic conditions. This is the underlying strength of what Stefan Molyneux said, and it is the catalyst for freedom which is so adamantly being suppressed to be kept from that certain collection of recessive traits/genes. If that genie ever gets back out of the bottle in a meaningful way, the rest goes away. And it is the thing so many of the West have been so inoculated against. But really, that’s the big key, because it unlocks everything else.

Apologies if this is OT, but somebody on social media in France referring to "we Yellow Vests" is calling for a total shutdown of the whole country ("schools, stores, offices, airports") on the 10th (Monday) and advising "the population" to "stock up on gas & oil, food & medicines" and so forth. Inviting people to join them at the barricades or simply to stay at home.

tz wrote:or was it Sargon of Akkad that couldn't even handle Richard Spencer?

Sargon's a gamma and Richard Spencer OBLITERATED him with ONE PERFECT INSULT. He hasn't recovered since. The guy ruins everything he becomes a part of: gamergate, Skeptics(TM), liberalists, atheism, classical liberalism, Kekistan, NPC meme, and currently UKIP.

He's got the reverse Midas' touch. I hope he becomes the leader of the IDW.

There are white "tribes" of north Africa (with blonde/red hair and blue/green eyes) such as the Riffians of Morocco. Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have their white tribes as well. Some theorize these people migrated during the last ice age around 10,000 years ago; walked across ice bridges at Gibraltar. So the original people of the northern coast of the African continent were white European stock. The Sahara was an impenetrable barrier for a million years for the sub-Saharan blacks, preventing any migration north.

These people of European stock went on to build the Egyptian Empire. You can clearly see that Rameses II had straight, blonde/reddish hair, pictures of his mummified remains are easily found.

Hannibal of Carthage was not black. Cleopatra was not black. But modern Americans believe they were. Like Denzel and Kerry Washington.

The modern narrative in the west is that black sub-Saharan Africans (as if from the Congo) built the Egyptian Empire. And the narrative continues that the Riffians and other white tribes of north Africa are only there because of the Barbary slave traders who pillaged Europe for slaves and women, so ONLY a result of a much more modern history.

The picture of Rameses II destroys that fiction. He looks almost exactly like Montgomery Burns' great-great grandfather.

Until we return to proper education and logic, people will continue to be insufferable fools who believe in self-serving fantasies. And nothing is more insufferable to modern Egyptologists than African Americans who visit and, filled with pride, declare "look what our people built."

Another aspect is lack of self control.Benji manages to tweet about 41's funeral in a way Kathy Griffin retweeted.

In this context I agree with Vox about "free speech" - if you mind is enslaved, even if voluntary, the speech is not from a free will, but you are merely a ventriloquist's dummy mouthing words you don't even believe or disbelieve - it takes faith and will to do that.

On 36, I stayed away from the term race. Because the concept is a bit more precise, and the collections are not limited to one group, though they are overwhelmingly expressed by one generalized group. It is certain recessive traits and not overshadowed by certain dominant traits. These traits for the brain (an organ, put together by the individuals DNA design) may be linked to external traits, or combinations, and it does seem likely to be so linked. But as such, there is no "racial purity standard," only the presence of certain combinations (likely associated with but not exclusive to certain outward traits and not necessarily present with)of recessive genes expressed and not suppressed or missing due to the presence of other dominant genes or countering recessive genes. Which also helps to provide an explanation for how one person can be creative in a way conducive to the creation/adding to civilization, and their nine siblings entirely destructive to it. Or why some may not be inclined to create, but are limited to simply, at most, maintain. In other words, there seems to be a code carried by humanity, with limited expression, that forms the impetus basis for the creation and advancement of civilization. For the maintenance of civilization in a slow downward destructive entropy without access to the creative side of things. And for the general destruction otherwise. Across groups, but currently prevalent within certain generally visually identifiable groups, in terms of the majority of creativeness, maintenance, or destructiveness. And this trend seems to have been stable over the timeframe of the last 7,000 or so years, as the prevalence for the distribution of certain recessive and dominant genes has moved geographically.

@27 tz @23 - or was it Sargon of Akkad that couldn't even handle Richard Spencer?---

I'm no big fan of either of these, but Spencer was the beginning of the downward spiral of Soygon. During some debate he said something to Serg'n like 'you're not as intelligent as you think you are' .

The IDWTF has been messing with Stefan for a while.Sam Harris essentially scolded Douglas Murray for speaking with Stefan, Joe Rogan strongly suggested to Owen Benjamin that he stay away from Stefan, JBP used Stefan early on as part of the long con but won't go near him now, and this isn't the first time Weinstein has taken a public shot at Stefan.It's good to see him finally pushing back.

Everyone here has to understand on important thing, and it's this: for some people, facts are hard to grasp.

Sometimes I vacillate between various permutations of hope and despair. Despair because the fact-challenged segment of the population seems ascendent.

But then hope. Why? Because, aside from incisive thinkers like Vox and Stefan (to a certain extent) we have another unlikely source for the truth: the science of population and behavioral genetics.

Ladies and Gents, it's coming. The truth is heading our way, and guys like David Reich, Svante Paabo, Robert Plomin, are laying the groundwork.

Oh, they may all pay lip service to the "acceptable" social constructs, but they can't help themselves but get to the lab, and do the studies and analyses that will invariably drive a stake into the heart of the delusions of social "science," and the political correctness that comes from the insane notions of equalitarianism.

Fourth-rate academics indeed. These people are nobodies. A biology professor at Evergreen State College. A psychology professor at the University of Toronto. Some guy who happens to work for Peter Thiel. None of these are prestigious positions, even for liberals who are into this sort of credentialism. And none of them have any significant accomplishments to their names. We should listen to them... why?

When you hear reactionaries talk about "elite overproduction" or the "managerial system", the Ineffectual Dork Wads are exactly the kind of detritus that they mean. Marginally-talented people grooming other marginally-talented people for lucrative yet entirely redundant positions in society, and accorded an elite status way out of line with their actual relevance and power.

Sam Harris essentially scolded Douglas Murray for speaking with Stefan, Joe Rogan strongly suggested to Owen Benjamin that he stay away from Stefan, JBP used Stefan early on as part of the long con but won't go near him now, and this isn't the first time Weinstein has taken a public shot at Stefan.

Only one of the many reasons I don't play the media whore game. It's like the Game of Junior High School Girls.

I doubt VD will ever take credit for it, but part of his legacy may include pushing guys like Stefan and Alex further to the nationalist right. He can't take credit for it bc the art of persuasion requires that people feel they arrived their conclusions on their own.

In any event, it's great to see Stefan pushing this position, and it's notable that Alex does not ever counter signal Vox's nationalist positions.

Hey now, she has an estimated net worth of $25-40 million and an annual income of $12 million, just from looking like an easy lay -- and I assume it's true, since I don't think she's anywhere near talented enough to pretend that well.

Which also says something about her audience, but still, her vagina deserves some credit for having already made her far more money than I will see in my lifetime.

electricsheeple wrote:I doubt VD will ever take credit for it, but part of his legacy may include pushing guys like Stefan and Alex further to the nationalist right. He can't take credit for it bc the art of persuasion requires that people feel they arrived their conclusions on their own.

I don't know about that because VD is way ahead of the game for them to "get it".

Like for instance I found out about VD through Stefan, saw some videos and interviews with him but never really changed my positions. Then something else would have happened, then I would remember that this is exactly what that Vox Day guy said it would happen. So I would rather say that people don't agree with Vox Day because they were persuaded by him, they agree with Vox Day because they can't ignore reality anymore.

The trend is clear. I agree with Vox on the whole free trade issue not because I have studied the matter and have DEVASTATING SINGLE TWEETS to back me up, I agree because the odds of him being wrong are very low.

Stefan's been on a bit of a downward slope from my perspective but after him visiting Poland his whole view on nationalism seems to have changed. If he would have listened to Vox years ago it would have saved him the trip.

Mercy me, a gentleman in the intellectual forum is motivated by something other than the detailed examination of the constituent parts of the subject at hand? He shall be declared outlaw, in that case, and merits not the privilege of debate.

Bret Weinstein was a proto-SJW himself back in the 80s -- he led a campaign against a frat at Penn State because they had strippers at a party and he found that exploitative and sexist. The Evergreen College kids turning on him was sweet karma. He's a doctrinaire leftist through and through.

Why is this a there even a comment section here? “Vox says it, that’s good enough for me” None of these other guys are even on the same plain as Vox and offer nothing!! They’re all pretenders or con men. I set my browser to Vox and deleted all the rest. I’m finally home.